Narrow Results

The subject of this paper is the description of a process-centered software development environment called MERLIN which monitors and guides teams of software developers and managers in producing software objects. Software objects (or objects for short) include all sorts of documents like requirements analysis, design, code, user manuals, contracts etc. For each user, MERLIN automatically displays a specific working context which contains information like objects, their relations, their current development state, and corresponding tools. This information is filtered according to the (access) rights and duties a particular user has in a particular project, i.e. the working context depends on the user's role (e.g. programmer, designer, manager). Internally, the computation of the information to be contained in a working context, is based on a rulelike definition of a software process and a flexible interpretation mechanism to enact such a process definition. The main feature of the interpreter is an alternating use of backward and forward chaining for the interpretation of rules. In addition, our implementation enables a persistent storage and incremental update during runtime of all process information expressed in facts within the MERLIN knowledge base.

Inquiry-based learning is a well-known strategy in STEM education. It aims to enhance conceptual learning, acquisition of scientific practices, and reflecting on the Nature of Science. However, evidence indicates that in practice, inquiry is often taught in a narrow, mainly experimental approach. This interpretive study analyzes teachers explicit and implicit views regarding implementing inquiry-based learning. The participants enrolled in three professional development programs. They were engaged in multiple genres of inquiry and were encouraged to design an inquiry activity. Data sources included observations, interviews, questionnaires, assignments, and reflections. Findings indicate that with regard to inquiry implementation, teachers were highly concerned about their students’ competency and their own’s working context. Teachers who discussed mostly challenges often designed a narrow-controlled inquiry, while teachers who reflected, negotiated, and challenged their initial views addressed more epistemic aspects of inquiry. Implications for supporting teachers’ development of a broader approach to inquiry learning are discussed.